Here, we develop a multistage, stochastic mixed-integer model to support biofuel supply chain expansion under evolving uncertainties. By utilizing the block-separable recourse property, we reformulate the multistage program in an equivalent two-stage program and solve it using an enhanced nested decomposition method with maximal non-dominated cuts. We conduct extensive numerical experiments and demonstrate the application of the model and algorithm in a case study based on the South Carolina settings. The value of multistage stochastic programming method is also explored by comparing the model solution with the counterparts of an expected value based deterministic model and a two-stage stochastic model.

@article{osti_1423076,
title = {A multistage stochastic programming model for a multi-period strategic expansion of biofuel supply chain under evolving uncertainties},
author = {Xie, Fei and Huang, Yongxi},
abstractNote = {Here, we develop a multistage, stochastic mixed-integer model to support biofuel supply chain expansion under evolving uncertainties. By utilizing the block-separable recourse property, we reformulate the multistage program in an equivalent two-stage program and solve it using an enhanced nested decomposition method with maximal non-dominated cuts. We conduct extensive numerical experiments and demonstrate the application of the model and algorithm in a case study based on the South Carolina settings. The value of multistage stochastic programming method is also explored by comparing the model solution with the counterparts of an expected value based deterministic model and a two-stage stochastic model.},
doi = {10.1016/j.tre.2018.01.015},
journal = {Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review},
number = C,
volume = 111,
place = {United States},
year = {2018},
month = {2}
}

The production of biofuels using second-generation feedstocks has been recognized as an important alternative source of sustainable energy and its demand is expected to increase due to regulations such as the Renewable Fuel Standard. However, the pathway to biofuel industry maturity faces unique, unaddressed challenges. Here, to address this challenges, this article presents an optimization model which quantifies and controls the impact of biomass quality variability on supply chain related decisions and technology selection. We propose a two-stage stochastic programming model and associated efficient solution procedures for solving large-scale problems to (1) better represent the random nature of the biomassmore » quality (defined by moisture and ash contents) in supply chain modeling, and (2) assess the impact of these uncertainties on the supply chain design and planning. The proposed model is then applied to a case study in the state of Tennessee. Results show that high moisture and ash contents negatively impact the unit delivery cost since poor biomass quality requires the addition of quality control activities. Experimental results indicate that supply chain cost could increase as much as 27%–31% when biomass quality is poor. We assess the impact of the biomass quality on the topological supply chain. Our case study indicates that biomass quality impacts supply chain costs; thus, it is important to consider the impact of biomass quality in supply chain design and management decisions.« less

Pioneer cellulosic biorefineries across the United States rely on a conventional feedstock supply system based on one-year contracts with local growers, who harvest, locally store, and deliver feedstock in low-density format to the conversion facility. While the conventional system is designed for high biomass yield areas, pilot scale operations have experienced feedstock supply shortages and price volatilities due to reduced harvests and competition from other industries. Regional supply dependency and the inability to actively manage feedstock stability and quality, provide operational risks to the biorefinery, which translate into higher investment risk. The advanced feedstock supply system based on a networkmore » of depots can mitigate many of these risks and enable wider supply system benefits. This paper compares the two concepts from a system-level perspective beyond mere logistic costs. It shows that while processing operations at the depot increase feedstock supply costs initially, they enable wider system benefits including supply risk reduction (leading to lower interest rates on loans), industry scale-up, conversion yield improvements, and reduced handling equipment and storage costs at the biorefinery. When translating these benefits into cost reductions per liter of gasoline equivalent (LGE), we find that total cost reductions between –$0.46 to –$0.21 per LGE for biochemical and –$0.32 to –$0.12 per LGE for thermochemical conversion pathways are possible. Naturally, these system level benefits will differ between individual actors along the feedstock supply chain. Further research is required with respect to depot sizing, location, and ownership structures.« less

Here, pioneer cellulosic biorefineries across the United States rely on a conventional feedstock supply system based on one-year contracts with local growers, who harvest, locally store, and deliver feed-stock in low-density format to the conversion facility. While the conventional system is designed for high biomass yield areas, pilot scale operations have experienced feedstock supply shortages and price volatilities due to reduced harvests and competition from other industries. Regional supply dependency and the inability to actively manage feedstock stability and quality, provide operational risks to the biorefinery, which translate into higher investment risk. The advanced feedstock supply system based on amore » network of depots can mitigate many of these risks and enable wider supply system benefits. This paper compares the two concepts from a system-level perspective beyond mere logistic costs. It shows that while processing operations at the depot increase feedstock supply costs initially, they enable wider system benefits including supply risk reduction (leading to lower interest rates on loans), industry scale-up, conversion yield improvements, and reduced handling equipment and storage costs at the biorefinery. When translating these benefits into cost reductions per liter of gasoline equivalent (LGE), we find that total cost reductions between -0.46 to -0.21 per LGE for biochemical and -0.32 to -0.12 per LGE for thermochemical conversion pathways are possible. Naturally, these system level benefits will differ between individual actors along the feedstock supply chain. Further research is required with respect to depot sizing, location, and ownership structures.« less

Pioneer cellulosic biorefineries across the United States rely on a conventional feedstock supply system based on one-year contracts with local growers, who harvest, locally store, and deliver feedstock in low-density format to the conversion facility. While the conventional system is designed for high biomass yield areas, pilot scale operations have experienced feedstock supply shortages and price volatilities due to reduced harvests and competition from other industries. Regional supply dependency and the inability to actively manage feedstock stability and quality, provide operational risks to the biorefinery, which translate into higher investment risk. The advanced feedstock supply system based on a networkmore » of depots can mitigate many of these risks and enable wider supply system benefits. This paper compares the two concepts from a system-level perspective beyond mere logistic costs. It shows that while processing operations at the depot increase feedstock supply costs initially, they enable wider system benefits including supply risk reduction (leading to lower interest rates on loans), industry scale-up, conversion yield improvements, and reduced handling equipment and storage costs at the biorefinery. When translating these benefits into cost reductions per liter of gasoline equivalent (LGE), we find that total cost reductions between –$0.46 to –$0.21 per LGE for biochemical and –$0.32 to –$0.12 per LGE for thermochemical conversion pathways are possible. Naturally, these system level benefits will differ between individual actors along the feedstock supply chain. Further research is required with respect to depot sizing, location, and ownership structures. Published 2015. This study is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining published by Society of Industrial Chemistry and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.« less

In this article we investigate energy supply investment requirements in Latin America until 2050 through a multi-model approach as jointly applied in the CLIMACAP-LAMP research project. We compare a business-as-usual scenario needed to satisfy anticipated future energy demand with a set of scenarios that aim to significantly reduce CO 2 emissions in the region. We find that more than a doubling of annual investments, in absolute terms, occurs in the business-as-usual scenario between 2010 and 2050, while investments may treble over the same time horizon when climate policies are introduced. However, investment costs as a share of GDP decline overmore » time in the business-as-usual scenario, as well as the climate policy scenarios, due to the fast economic growth in that region. Business-as-usual cumulative investments of 1.4 trillion US$ are anticipated between 2010 and 2050 in energy supply, and increase when additional climate policies are introduced: under a carbon tax of 50 $/tCO 2e in 2020 increasing with a rate of 4% per year, an additional 0.6 trillion US$ (+45%) investment is needed. Climate control measures lead to increased investment in low-carbon electricity technologies, primarily wind, solar, and CCS applied to fossil fuels and biomass. Our analysis suggests that compared to the business-as-usual case an average additional 21 billion US$ per year of electricity supply investments is required in Latin America until 2050 under a climate policy aiming at 2°C climate stabilization. Conversely, there is a disinvestment in fossil fuels. For oil production, a growth from 58 billion US$ to 130 billion US$ annual investment by 2050 is anticipated in a business-as-usual scenario: ambitious climate policy reduces this to 28 billion US$. Finally, mobilizing necessary additional investment capital, in particular for low-carbon technologies, will be a challenge, and suitable frameworks and enabling environments for a scale-up in public and private investment will be critical to help reach required levels. The economic case for such a transition still remains to be articulated.« less